While most birthers will undoubtedly be completely inconsistent on the matter, considering Barack Obama to be ineligible for the White House but Ted Cruz to be entirely eligible, at least one well-known birther, Sheriff Richard Mack of Arizona, is being consistent.
Most mainstream legal observers hold that Cruz is still eligible to be president — just as Obama would have been even if he had concocted an elaborate scheme to lie about his place of birth — but the case highlights the hypocricy of the anti-Obama birther movement.
One prominent birther has at least decided to stay consistent. Richard Mack, a former Arizona sheriff who now heads the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association — a guild of officers who believe the county sheriff has the authority to defy and arrest federal officials — said in a recent Blog Talk Radio interview that he believes Cruz is ineligible for the presidency.
In response to a caller who argued that the Constitution bars the Canadian-born Cruz from being president, Mack said, “That is correct, I try to say that to a lot of people. Ted Cruz cannot run for president of the United States.”“I like Ted, I’ve met him several times and he’s kind of a friend of mine, but he can’t run for president,” he continued.
He’s absolutely wrong in both cases. If you are the child of an American citizen — only one, no matter what citizenship the other parent has — you are a natural born citizen no matter where you were actually born. But if the usual birther standard was applied honestly, Obama would be eligible while Cruz would not. Why? Because Obama was born in the United States and Cruz was not. But the truth is that they’re both eligible.